Something is bothering me recently…
There has been a term thrown around recently on the blogs of several well-known marketers and pro-consumer advocates…
A group of Internet Marketers allegedly forming a “closed door” endorsed marketing and product launch sequence that results in sales of high-ticket info-products being sold (most for $1997 each).
My view on this trend, disturbing. Very sad and very disturbing.
When you endorse a product, it’s extremely important that you’ve used that product, or reviewed that product so you can make a justified determination in your endorsement for the reader of your email or blog post.
This doesn’t seem to be happening in this close-knit circle of marketers.
Now, I’m no lawyer, so the legal aspects of this are best left to them to discuss…but ethically, this needs to be challenged.
In reading some of the blog posts circulating about this subject, I’m finding that to join this Internet Marketing Syndicate, you must promote a schedule of products, no matter what. Yours then gets promoted once as a result of being part of this group…no matter what.
So…products are being promoted randomly, without a second thought to the person forking over their hard-earned $1997 to buy them?
Are these individuals that desperate for income or something?
At what point do you make the leap from teaching a market of people to do something (keyword: people), to simply trying to extract money from that market without regard to the quality of products being sold?
To me, you don’t cross that bridge. To me, if you do cross that bridge, you cross into the dark underbelly of the marketing world, and even worse… by example as a “leader” in the market (a term I use loosely), you justify these actions as “ok” for new people entering the marketing business.
And that’s NOT ok.
Now, I’m going to admit I haven’t been 100% perfect when it comes to endorsed marketing (I don’t think anyone has), but I always strive to be as close to that 100% perfect as I possibly can.
This alleged Syndicate is far from perfect at all, or so it seems. Do they think they’re above common business ethics?
I’m starting to wonder.